Effects of the Endpoint Adjudication Process on the Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial: The ADVANCE Trial
|
|
- Henry Burns
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Effects of the Endpoint Adjudication Process on the Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial: The ADVANCE Trial Jun Hata 1, Hisatomi Arima 1, Sophia Zoungas 1,2, Greg Fulcher 3, Carol Pollock 3, Mark Adams 4, John Watson 5, Rohina Joshi 1, Andre Pascal Kengne 1, Toshiharu Ninomiya 1, Craig Anderson 1, Mark Woodward 1, Anushka Patel 1, Giuseppe Mancia 6, Neil Poulter 7, Stephen MacMahon 1, John Chalmers 1, Bruce Neal 1 *, on behalf of the ADVANCE Collaborative Group " 1 The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 2 School of Public Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia, 3 Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 4 Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 5 Sydney Adventist Hospital Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 6 University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy, 7 Imperial College, London, United Kingdom Abstract Background: Endpoint adjudication committees (EPAC) are widely used in clinical trials. The aim of the present analysis is to assess the effects of the endpoint adjudication process on the main findings of the ADVANCE trial (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT ). Methods and Findings: The ADVANCE trial was a multicentre, 262 factorial randomised controlled trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive blood glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Primary outcomes were major macrovascular (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke and cardiovascular death) and microvascular (new or worsening nephropathy and retinopathy) events. Suspected primary outcomes were initially reported by the investigators at the 215 sites with subsequent adjudication by the EPAC. The EPAC also adjudicated upon potential events identified directly by ongoing screening of all reported events. Over a median follow-up of 5 years, the site investigators reported one or more primary outcomes among 2443 participants. After adjudication these events were confirmed for 2077 (85%) with 48 further events added through the EPAC-led database screening process. The estimated relative risk reductions (95% confidence intervals) in the primary outcome for the blood pressure lowering comparison were 8% (21 to 15%) based on the investigator-reported events and 9% (0 to 17%) based on the EPAC-based events (P for homogeneity = 0.70). The corresponding findings for the glucose comparison were 8% (1 to 15%) and 10% (2% to 18%) (P for homogeneity = 0.60). The effect estimates were also highly comparable when studied separately for macrovascular events and microvascular events for both comparisons (all P for homogeneity.0.6). Conclusions: The endpoint adjudication process had no discernible impact on the main findings in ADVANCE. These data highlight the need for careful consideration of the likely impact of an EPAC on the findings and conclusions of clinical trials prior to their establishment. Citation: Hata J, Arima H, Zoungas S, Fulcher G, Pollock C, et al. (2013) Effects of the Endpoint Adjudication Process on the Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial: The ADVANCE Trial. PLoS ONE 8(2): e doi: /journal.pone Editor: Isabelle Boutron, University Paris Descartes, France Received November 7, 2012; Accepted January 2, 2013; Published February 4, 2013 Copyright: ß 2013 Hata et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Funding: The ADVANCE trial was supported by grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia ( and ; nhmrc.gov.au) and Servier ( The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal s policy and have the following conflicts: SZ reports being an advisory board member for MSD, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca, and BMS, and receiving lecture fees from Servier, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Boheringer Ingelheim, Sanofi Aventis, Astra Zeneca and BMS. CP reports being an advisory board member for Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Janssen Cilag, Reata and Abbott, and receiving lecture fees from MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim and BMS. MW reports receiving consulting fees from Roche and lecture fees from Servier and Sonofi Aventis. NP reports receiving grant support from Pfizer, Julius Clinical Research, and Novartis, and lecture fees from Gilead, Daiichi-Sankyo, Servier, Takeda, Pfizer, Novo-Nordisk, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Jannsen. SM reports being an advisory board member for Servier, Pfizer, and Novartis, and receiving lecture fees from Servier and Pfizer and grant support from Servier, Pfizer, and Novartis. JC reports being a member of an advisory board for Servier and receiving lecture fees and grant support from Servier. BN reports being a board member of Roche, Takeda, and Pepsico and receiving lecture fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pepsico, Pfizer, Pharmacy Guild of Australia, Sanofi Aventis, Servier, and Tanabe. This study was partly funded by Servier. There are no patents, products in development, or marketed products products to declare. This does not alter the authors adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in the guide for authors. * bneal@georgeinstitute.org.au " Membership of the ADVANCE Collaborative Group is provided in the Acknowledgments. PLOS ONE 1 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
2 Introduction Much attention is given to the diagnosis of outcomes in largescale multicentre trials because achieving consistency of reporting is perceived as a major challenge [2]. Standardized definitions of outcomes and protocols for their assignment are routinely used, but the possibility of misclassification remains. Accordingly, the design of most recent large-scale trials has included an endpoint adjudication committee (EPAC) that is blinded to study treatments and is responsible for assuring the validity of diagnoses for main trial outcomes [3 11]. However, it remains uncertain whether the endpoint adjudication process really improves the precision and validity of the treatment effects reported. The Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT ) was a multicentre, 2x2 factorial randomised controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes, which demonstrated separately beneficial effects of blood pressure lowering and intensive blood glucose control on the development of major macrovascular and microvascular diseases [1,12,13]. The aim of the present analysis is to assess the impact of the endpoint adjudication process on the main findings of the ADVANCE trial. Methods Ethics statement Approval for the ADVANCE trial was obtained from each centre s institutional review board, and all participants provided written informed consent. A full list of 215 centres that participated in the trial was published previously [1]. Design of the ADVANCE trial The design of the ADVANCE trial has been described in detail previously [1,12,13], and the CONSORT checklist is available as Supporting Information, see Checklist S1. In brief, a total of patients with type 2 diabetes aged $55 years, with a history of major macrovascular or microvascular disease or at least one other risk factor for vascular disease, were enrolled from 215 centres in 20 countries between June 2001 and March After a 6-week active run-in period with fixed-combination of perindopril and indapamide during which usual glucose control was continued, participants were randomly assigned, in a 2x2 factorial design, to continued perindopril-indapamide or matching placebo and to either a gliclazide MR based intensive glucose control strategy aiming for a haemoglobin A1c of #6.5% or a standard glucose control strategy. Study treatments were allocated using a central, computer-based, randomisation service accessible by internet, telephone, and facsimile. Randomisation was stratified by study centre, history of macrovascular disease, history of microvascular disease, and background use of perindopril at baseline. All participants were allocated to one of the two randomised groups for both the blood pressure and the blood glucose interventions. The blood pressure lowering intervention was a placebo-controlled double-blind design, in which site investigators, patients and endpoint adjudicators were all blinded to randomised treatment allocation. The blood glucose control intervention was a prospective randomised open blinded endpoint (PROBE) design, in which site investigators and patients were not blinded but all endpoint adjudicators were blinded. Median treatment follow-up was 4.3 years for the blood pressure lowering arm of the trial, and 5 years for the glucose control intervention (Figure 1). Definitions of study outcomes The primary outcomes of the ADVANCE trial were a composite of major macrovascular events (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death) and a composite of major microvascular events (new or worsening nephropathy or retinopathy), considered both jointly and separately. Myocardial infarction was defined as the presence of any two of the following three criteria; (1) a history of typical ischaemic symptoms lasting for $15 minutes and unresponsive to sublingual nitrates (if given), (2) diagnostic electrocardiogram changes (e.g. ST segment elevation/depression, new pathological Q wave), and (3) raised biochemical markers of myocardial damage (e.g. creatine kinase, troponin T); or autopsy findings of acute myocardial infarction (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision [ICD-10] codes of I21.0-I21.9, I22.0-I22.9). Stroke was defined as a clinical history of acute disturbance of focal neurological function resulting in symptoms lasting.24 hours and thought to be due to brain infarction or intracranial haemorrhage (ICD-10 codes of I61.0-I61.9, I62.1, I62.9, I63.0-I63.9, I64) supported by brain imaging or autopsy. Subarachnoid haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage and transient ischaemic attack were not included in the definition of stroke. Nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke was defined as an event that did not result in death within 28 days from onset. Cardiovascular death was defined as any death in which the proximate or the underlying cause of death was due to a disease of the circulatory system (ICD-10 codes of I10- I14, I20-I25, I26, I27.9, I28, I50-I52, I60-I67, I69, I70-I79, I80- I89) or a sudden death (ICD-10 codes of R96.0, R96.1, I46.1, R98). New or worsening nephropathy was defined as development of macroalbuminuria (a urinary albumin to creatinine ratio.300 mg/mg) confirmed by two positive results, doubling of the serum creatinine to a level of at least 200 mmol/l, the need for renal replacement therapy (dialysis or transplantation), or death from renal disease (ICD-10 codes of N00-N29, E11.2, I12, I13). New or worsening retinopathy was defined as development of proliferative retinopathy, macular oedema or diabetes-related blindness, or the use of retinal photocoagulation therapy. A secondary outcome, also included in the present analysis, was death from any cause. Event reporting by the site investigators The site investigators were a diverse group of physicians with different levels of experience trained in many different countries. Serious events recorded in the trial (including all suspected primary and secondary outcomes) were identified and first reported by one of the local site investigators using a standard serious event form accompanied by specified supporting documents. These outcomes were all assigned an ICD-10 or study-specific code (for those without applicable ICD-10 codes) by the clinical coordinator of the ADVANCE trial on the basis of the site investigators diagnoses. Event reporting by the EPAC All possible primary outcomes and deaths (both cardiovascular and noncardiovascular) were reviewed by the EPAC whose members (comprising cardiologists, neurologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists and ophthalmologists) were blinded to randomised treatment assignments. Using the supporting documents (e.g. electrocardiogram findings, laboratory test reports, findings of brain computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, clinical notes, ophthalmology reports, autopsy reports and death certificates), which had been translated as necessary, the EPAC either confirmed or refuted the initial diagnosis reported by the site investigators using standardized definitions and protocol. When PLOS ONE 2 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
3 Figure 1. Enrolment, randomisation, and follow-up of study participants. A total of patients were randomly assigned, in a 2x2 factorial design, to active blood pressure lowering treatment with perindopril-indapamide or matching placebo, and to a gliclazide-based intensive glucose control strategy or a standard glucose control strategy. doi: /journal.pone g001 the initial diagnosis made by the site investigator was refuted, an alternative diagnosis was provided and an ICD-10 or studyspecific code assigned. In addition, throughout the trial we conducted central searches of all information collected on serious events and follow-up assessments, to identify possible primary outcomes that might have been incorrectly or incompletely reported by the site investigators. For these potential additional events supporting data were sought from the site investigators and then reviewed by the EPAC in the same way. Consequently, the EPAC identified misclassification in the site investigators diagnosis (e.g. misclassification between myocardial infarction and stroke, misclassification between fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, incorrect causes of death). The EPAC also reviewed incomplete or unclassified events (e.g. unspecified cardiovascular disease, death of unknown cause) and determined whether these events met the definition of each outcome or not. In addition, laboratory data such as serum creatinine and urine albumin/ creatinine ratio in the follow-up assessments were reviewed to identify possible unreported nephropathy events. Consequently, 3 events of nonfatal myocardial infarction, 4 of nonfatal stroke, and 10 of new or worsening nephropathy which were unreported or misclassified by the site investigators, were included into the outcomes by the EPAC. The EPAC also added 95 cardiovascular death events from the patients who were classified as death from non-cardiovascular or unknown causes by site investigators (Table 1). Statistical methods The impact of the endpoint adjudication process on the main results of the ADVANCE trial was estimated by calculating the treatment effects on the outcomes of interest using univariate Cox proportional hazards models. The models were first fitted using the dataset based on the site investigators initial diagnoses and second using the dataset based on the EPAC final diagnoses. For composite outcomes and patients with multiple events, the first applicable event was used in each analysis. All analyses were done according to the principle of intention to treat with relative risk reductions reported as percentage reductions ([1 - hazard ratio] PLOS ONE 3 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
4 Table 1. Number of events reported by the site investigators (SI) and confirmed, declined or added by the endpoint adjudication committee (EPAC) over a median follow-up of 5 years. Outcome Reported by SI Confirmed by EPAC* Declined by EPAC* Added by EPAC{ Diagnosed by EPAC Combined major macrovascular and microvascular events (85.0%) 366 (15.0%) 48 (2.3%) 2125 Major macrovascular events (83.8%) 212 (16.2%) 49 (4.3%) 1147 Nonfatal myocardial infarction (76.7%) 93 (23.3%) 3 (1.0%) 309 Nonfatal stroke (72.7%) 157 (27.3%) 4 (0.9%) 423 Cardiovascular death (91.8%) 40 (8.2%) 95 (17.5%) 542 Major microvascular events (82.7%) 235 (17.3%) 9 (0.8%) 1131 New or worsening nephropathy (84.5%) 94 (15.5%) 10 (1.9%) 522 New or worsening retinopathy (79.9%) 171 (20.1%) 0 (0.0%) 681 Death from any cause (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1031 *Number and percentage among the events originally reported by SI. { Number and percentage among the events finally diagnosed by EPAC. doi: /journal.pone t ). The homogeneity between the treatment effects estimated using the site investigators diagnoses and the EPAC diagnoses was addressed through a test of the null hypothesis that the EPAC hazard ratio was equal to the investigators hazard ratio for each outcome [3]. This test exploits the sequential nature of the diagnostic process; the EPAC diagnosis was made in the knowledge of the investigators diagnosis. In addition, we estimated the percentage of error saved by the endpoint adjudication process through a comparison of mean square errors (MSEs) [3]. Assuming that the effect estimate based on the EPAC diagnoses is unbiased, the percentage of error saved by the endpoint adjudication process was estimated as = {(!MSE[i] -!MSE[e])/!MSE[i]}6100, where MSE[e] is the variance of the log hazard ratio based on the EPAC diagnoses and MSE[i] is the variance of the log hazard ratio based on the investigators diagnoses plus the squared difference between the log hazard ratio estimate based on the investigators and the EPAC diagnoses. The bias-corrected and accelerated mean and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the percentage of error saved by the endpoint adjudication process (which had a skewed distribution) was estimated from 10,000 bootstrap samples. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA). Results Comparison of diagnoses made by site investigators and the EPAC Over a median follow-up of 5 years, the site investigators reported one or more primary macrovascular or microvascular outcome for 2443 participants. After adjudication these events were confirmed for 2077 (85%) with 48 further events added through the database screening process (Table 1). The numbers of events initially reported by the site investigators and finally diagnosed by the EPAC were 1310 and 1147 for major macrovascular events, 1357 and 1131 for major microvascular events, and 1031 and 1031 for death from any cause, respectively. The proportion of the investigator-reported events confirmed by the EPAC was greater than 70% for all the composite primary outcomes and their major components. Impact of endpoint adjudication on the effect estimates for blood pressure lowering comparison Figure 2 demonstrates the effects of blood pressure lowering treatment on the relative risk reductions of outcomes based on the initial diagnoses made by the site investigators and those based on the final diagnoses of the EPAC. Perindopril/indapamide-based blood pressure lowering treatment reduced the risk of combined macrovascular and microvascular events based on the investigators diagnoses by 8% (95% CI -1 to 15%) and those based on the EPAC diagnoses by 9% (95% CI 0 to 17%) (P = 0.70 for homogeneity). Estimates of treatment effect based on the investigators diagnoses and the EPAC diagnoses were highly comparable for every other outcome reported for this comparison (all P for homogeneity.0.6). In addition the estimated percent error saved by the adjudication process was small in every case. Impact of endpoint adjudication on the effect estimates for the glucose comparison The effects of intensive glucose control on relative risks are shown in Figure 3. There were comparable reductions in the relative risks of combined macrovascular and microvascular events based on the investigators diagnoses (8%, 95% CI 1 to 15%) and on the EPAC diagnoses (10%, 95% CI 2 to 18%) (P for homogeneity = 0.60). Likewise, there was no difference in estimates of treatment effect based on the investigators diagnoses and the EPAC diagnoses for every other outcome (all P for homogeneity.0.7) and the percent error saved by the adjudication process was again minimal in every case. Discussion In the present analysis, the endpoint adjudication process moved the point estimates of relative risk reductions in the blood pressure arm slightly to the left (more favourable in the active group) for 4 outcomes, slightly to the right (less favourable) for 3 outcomes, and left the estimate unchanged for 2 outcomes. The corresponding 95% CIs were made slightly wider by adjudication for 7 outcomes, slightly narrower for 1 outcome and were unchanged for 1 outcome. In the glucose arm, point estimates were moved slightly to the left for 3 outcomes, slightly to the right for 3 outcomes, and unchanged for 3 outcomes; and 95% CIs were made slightly wider for 7 outcomes, slightly narrower for 1 PLOS ONE 4 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
5 Figure 2. Effects of endpoint adjudication on the results of ADVANCE blood pressure lowering arm. Effects of blood pressure lowering treatment on the risks of clinical outcomes were examined based on diagnoses reported by the site investigators (SI) and those assigned by the endpoint adjudication committee (EPAC). Centers of the boxes are placed at the estimates of effect; areas of the boxes are proportional to the reciprocal of the variance of the estimates. Horizontal lines represent 95% confidence intervals (CI). doi: /journal.pone g002 outcome and were unchanged for 1 outcome. For none of the analyses were the estimates based on the adjudicated outcomes shown to be substantially different from the estimates made using the original diagnoses reported by the investigators, and in every case the error saved through the adjudication process was small. Our findings raise some uncertainty about the purely scientific value of the endpoint adjudication process in large-scale randomised controlled trials with characteristics similar to those of the ADVANCE trial, though as discussed below this may vary with trial design. On the other hand, the adjudication process does provide reassurance to users of the trial results including health funders and regulators. While the scientific value of endpoint adjudication in large-scale randomised controlled trials may be debatable, it is clear that it will remain an essential element for trial design as long as regulatory agencies insist upon it before approving new treatments or devices. Multicentre trials are clearly at risk of outcome misclassification caused by differential application of definitions by site investigators. Three factors seem to be associated with the risk of misclassification and the necessity of adjudication processes; namely the nature of outcomes, the quality of site investigators and the study design. The nature of the outcomes is a primary factor which is associated with the risk of misclassification. This risk can be minimized by adopting hard outcomes with clear and objective definitions. We recently reported that the misclassification of outcomes in the Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS) (i.e. stroke, myocardial infarction and causespecific death) is infrequent and that the EPAC had little impact on treatment effects [3]. A recent systematic review of investigator and EPAC diagnoses showed good inter-observer agreement for reporting of macrovascular outcomes of this type [4]. In the PLOS ONE 5 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
6 Figure 3. Effects of endpoint adjudication on the results of ADVANCE blood glucose control arm. Effects of intensive glucose control on the risks of clinical outcomes were examined based on diagnoses reported by the site investigators (SI) and those assigned by the endpoint adjudication committee (EPAC). Centers of the boxes are placed at the estimates of effect; areas of the boxes are proportional to the reciprocal of the variance of the estimates. Horizontal lines represent 95% confidence intervals (CI). doi: /journal.pone g003 present study, we reconfirmed similar results for macrovascular outcomes and death. In addition, the present study is the first report to confirm the lack of significant influence of the adjudication process on the estimates of microvascular complications in diabetes. The macrovascular and microvascular events that formed the primary outcome in ADVANCE are fairly easy to diagnose correctly and death is the least likely event to be misreported. On the other hand, there will be some circumstances in which adjudication is required. For example, in the Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy (PURSUIT) trial, in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), importantly different estimates of treatment effects have been reported based on adjudicated and unadjudicated diagnoses of myocardial infarction [5,6]. Although myocardial infarction is usually considered to be a hard outcome and easy to diagnose (as in the ADVANCE trial), the accurate diagnosis of myocardial infarction may be more difficult in specific circumstances, such as the acute setting of ACS in the PURSUIT trial. Thus, in studies using soft outcomes which are difficult to diagnose objectively or derived from less reliable sources, the adjudication process may exert a significant impact on the study conclusions. The quality of site investigators may be also an important factor. In ADVANCE, the sites involved were centres of excellence in their respective countries with leadership by senior physicians in the field. Large scale clinical trials have rigorous site selection processes and it may well be that careful site selection is able to provide similar degrees of assurance of reliable outcome reporting to that obtained through a separate endpoint adjudication process. Study design is possibly the most important determinant of the necessity for an independent endpoint adjudication process. Even if hard outcomes and careful site selection do apply, it is impossible PLOS ONE 6 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
7 to eradicate outcome misclassification completely. However, this need not be a major issue provided rigorous randomization is used, thus ensuring that the risks of misclassification are nondifferential between the treatment groups to be compared. Such nondifferential misclassification can be achieved in doubleblinded randomised trials (e.g. blood pressure arm in ADVANCE) in which site investigators report events without any knowledge of study treatments. If the misclassification is infrequent and nondifferential, adjudication processes may have little impact on point estimates of treatment effect. The risks of differential misclassification are theoretically greater in open-label trials, where site investigators may have preconceived notions about the treatment effect and may report outcome-related events differentially between the treatment groups. Even here however, these risks may be minimized through use of a PROBE design with reliance on a blinded adjudication process, as was used in the glucose arm of ADVANCE. An adjudication process may also be important for observational studies in which differential misclassification between the study groups may be more likely. In the present analysis in ADVANCE, the systematic slight widening of the CIs in relative risks in both treatment arms was attributable to the EPAC discarding a small number of the events originally reported by the site investigators. There was no evidence of bias in the point estimates of treatment effect based on unadjudicated outcomes. Therefore, it would appear that the primary impact of the adjudication process was to slightly reduce the statistical power. Endpoint adjudication in the ADVANCE trial consumed very considerable resources and, although a formal estimate of cost was not possible, likely required more than a million dollars. These resources were mostly expended on the collection of additional data from sites, translation of documents, payment of the adjudicators and central coordination including the establishment of a dedicated database and tracking tool. With clinical research costs escalating, it is the responsibility of researchers to ensure that scarce resources are applied as sparingly and as efficiently as possible. In conclusion, the endpoint adjudication process used in the ADVANCE trial had no discernible effect on the main findings of References 1. ADVANCE Collaborative Group (2007) Effects of a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide on macrovascular and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the ADVANCE trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 370: Granger CB, Vogel V, Cummings SR, Held P, Fiedorek F, et al. (2008) Do we need to adjudicate major clinical events? Clin Trials 5: Ninomiya T, Donnan G, Anderson N, Bladin C, Chambers B, et al. (2009) Effects of the end point adjudication process on the results of the Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS). Stroke 40: Pogue J, Walter SD, Yusuf S (2009) Evaluating the benefit of event adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes in large simple RCTs. Clin Trials 6: Mahaffey KW, Harrington RA, Akkerhuis M, Kleiman NS, Berdan LG, et al. (2001) Systematic adjudication of myocardial infarction end-points in an international clinical trial. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med 2: Mahaffey KW, Harrington RA, Akkerhuis M, Kleiman NS, Berdan LG, et al. (2001) Disagreements between central clinical events committee and site investigator assessments of myocardial infarction endpoints in an international clinical trial: review of the PURSUIT study. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med 2: Petersen JL, Haque G, Hellkamp AS, Flaker GC, Mark Estes NA 3rdet al(2006) Comparing classifications of death in the Mode Selection Trial: agreement and disagreement among site investigators and a clinical events committee. Contemp Clin Trials 27: the trial in regard to either macrovascular or microvascular outcomes. These data highlight the need for careful consideration of the likely impact of an EPAC on the findings and conclusions of clinical trials prior to their establishment. The appointment of an EPAC has now become a knee jerk response in the design of largescale clinical trials, but actually warrants the same careful scientific consideration as other aspects of the trial design. Thus the need for formal endpoint adjudication may vary with the trial design, the outcomes and the settings in which the particular trial is conducted. Formal quantitative estimates of the likelihood of an adjudication process influencing trial conclusions might also be used to better understand the potential benefits of implementing an EPAC. In addition, national and international regulatory agencies could play a lead role in rationalizing the use of adjudication processes by providing explicit advice based on a clear understanding of what an EPAC can reasonably be expected to contribute. Although the reassurance that the EPAC provided to the users of the ADVANCE trial was no doubt of substantial importance, there may be more cost-efficient ways of achieving this goal. Supporting Information Checklist S1 (DOC) Acknowledgments CONSORT checklist of the present study. The full list of the ADVANCE Collaborative Group was published previously [1]. Author Contributions Revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content: HA SZ GF CP MA JW RJ APK TN CA MW AP GM NP SM JC BN. Conceived and designed the experiments: JH HA SZ GF CP MA JW RJ APK TN CA MW AP GM NP SM JC BN. Analyzed the data: JH. Wrote the paper: JH HA JC BN. 8. Cleland JG, Erhardt L, Hall AS, Winter C, Ball SG, et al. (1993) Validation of primary and secondary outcomes and classification of mode of death among patients with clinical evidence of heart failure after a myocardial infarction: a report from the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) Study Investigators. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 22(Suppl 9): S22 S Näslund U, Grip L, Fischer-Hansen J, Gundersen T, Lehto S, et al. (1999) The impact of an end-point committee in a large multicentre, randomized, placebocontrolled clinical trial: results with and without the end-point committee s final decision on end-points. Eur Heart J 20: Mahaffey KW, Roe MT, Dyke CK, Newby LK, Kleiman NS, et al. (2002) Misreporting of myocardial infarction end points: results of adjudication by a central clinical events committee in the PARAGON-B trial. Am Heart J 143: Walter SD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, King D, Troyan S, et al. (1997) Outcome assessment for clinical trials: how many adjudicators do we need? Control Clin Trials 18: ADVANCE Management Committee (2001) Study rationale and design of ADVANCE: action in diabetes and vascular disease - preterax and diamicron MR controlled evaluation. Diabetologia 44: ADVANCE Collaborative Group (2008) Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 358: PLOS ONE 7 February 2013 Volume 8 Issue 2 e55807
ADVANCE post trial ObservatioNal Study
Hot Topics in Diabetes 50 th EASD, Vienna 2014 ADVANCE post trial ObservatioNal Study Sophia Zoungas The George Institute The University of Sydney Rationale and Study Design Sophia Zoungas The George Institute
More informationEffects of the End Point Adjudication Process on the Results of the Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS)
Effects of the End Point Adjudication Process on the Results of the Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS) Toshiharu Ninomiya, MD, PhD; Geoff Donnan, MD; Neil Anderson, MD, PhD;
More informationFollow-up of Blood-Pressure Lowering and Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes
The new england journal of medicine original article Follow-up of Blood-Pressure Lowering and Glucose in Type Diabetes S. Zoungas, J. Chalmers, B. Neal, L. Billot, Q. Li, Y. Hirakawa, H. Arima, H. Monaghan,
More informationThis regimen can safely be recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes in all of these regions. Diabetes Care 34: , 2011
Clinical Care/Education/Nutrition/Psychosocial Research O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E Does Glycemic Control Offer Similar Benefits Among Patients With Diabetes in Different Regions of the World? Results
More informationType 2 diabetes affects 240 million
Pathophysiology/Complications O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E Combined Effects of Routine Blood Pressure Lowering and Intensive Glucose Control on Macrovascular and Microvascular Outcomes in Patients With
More informationA factorial randomized trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in 11,140 patients with type 2 diabetes
A factorial randomized trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in 11,140 patients with type 2 diabetes Hypotheses: Among individuals with type 2 diabetes, the risks of major microvascular
More informationMethods The PARAGON-B trial
Misreporting of myocardial infarction end points: Results of adjudication by a central clinical events committee in the PARAGON-B trial Kenneth W. Mahaffey, MD, a Matthew T. Roe, MD, a Christopher K. Dyke,
More informationJ. Michael Gaziano, M.D., M.P.H. European Society of Cardiology August 26 th 2018
ARRIVE (Aspirin to Reduce Risk of Initial Vascular Events): A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Aspirin in Patients at Moderate Risk of Cardiovascular Disease J. Michael Gaziano, M.D., M.P.H.
More informationIndustry Relationships and Institutional Affiliations
Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in high cardiovascular risk patients with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia on maximally tolerated daily statin: results from the ODYSSEY COMBO II study Christopher
More informationResults from RE-LY and RELY-ABLE
Results from RE-LY and RELY-ABLE Assessment of the safety and efficacy of dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa ) in longterm stroke prevention EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa ) has shown a consistent
More informationPROTEZIONE DAL DANNO RENALE NEL DIABETE TIPO 2: RUOLO DEI NUOVI FARMACI. Massimo Boemi UOC Malattie Metaboliche e Diabetologia IRCCS INRCA Ancona
PROTEZIONE DAL DANNO RENALE NEL DIABETE TIPO 2: RUOLO DEI NUOVI FARMACI Massimo Boemi UOC Malattie Metaboliche e Diabetologia IRCCS INRCA Ancona Disclosure Dr Massimo Boemi has been granted as speaker
More informationJournal of Hypertension RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH PERMANENT DISCONTINUATION OF BLOOD PRESSURE LOWERING MEDICATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES
Journal of Hypertension RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH PERMANENT DISCONTINUATION OF BLOOD PRESSURE LOWERING MEDICATIONS IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES --Manuscript Draft-- Manuscript Number: Full Title: Article
More informationThe publication of the U.K. Prospective
D I A B E T E S A N D C A R D I O V A S C U L A R D I S E A S E A Summary of the ADVANCE Trial SIMON R. HELLER, DM, FRCP ON BEHALF OF THE ADVANCE COLLABORATIVE GROUP* The publication of the U.K. Prospective
More informationGli endpoint micro-vascolari nei trial di outcome cardiovascolare
Gli endpoint micro-vascolari nei trial di outcome cardiovascolare Giorgio Sesti University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro ITALY Potenziali conflitti di interesse Il Prof Giorgio Sesti dichiara di aver ricevuto
More informationGlucose Control and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease
Glucose Control and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Dr Peter A Senior BMedSci MBBS PhD FRCP(E) Associate Professor, Director Division of Endocrinology, University of Alberta Diabetes Update+, March
More informationImpact of age, age at diagnosis and duration of diabetes on the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications and death in type 2 diabetes
Diabetologia () 7:6 7 DOI.7/s--69-7 ARTICLE Impact of age, age at diagnosis and duration of diabetes on the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications and death in type diabetes Sophia Zoungas
More informationEffects of a perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen on cardiac outcomes among patients with cerebrovascular disease
European Heart Journal (2003) 24, 475 484 Effects of a perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen on cardiac outcomes among patients with cerebrovascular disease PROGRESS Collaborative Group 1*
More informationWhy is Earlier and More Aggressive Treatment of T2 Diabetes Better?
Blood glucose (mmol/l) Why is Earlier and More Aggressive Treatment of T2 Diabetes Better? Disclosures Dr Kennedy has provided CME, been on advisory boards or received travel or conference support from:
More informationIntensive Blood Glucose Control and Vascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
T h e n e w e ng l a nd j o u r na l o f m e dic i n e original article Blood Glucose Control and Vascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes The ADVANCE Collaborative Group* A bs tr ac t The members
More informationCardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: the impact of preventative therapies
Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. ISSN 0077-8923 ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Issue: The Year in Diabetes and Obesity Cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: the impact of preventative therapies Sophia
More informationAssociation of HbA 1c levels with vascular complications and death in patients with type 2 diabetes: evidence of glycaemic thresholds
Diabetologia (0) :636 643 DOI 0.007/s00-0-404- ARTICLE Association of HbA c levels with vascular complications and death in patients with type diabetes: evidence of glycaemic thresholds S. Zoungas & J.
More informationASCEND A randomized trial of omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil) versus placebo for primary cardiovascular prevention in 15,480 patients with diabetes
ASCEND A randomized trial of omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil) versus placebo for primary cardiovascular prevention in 15,480 patients with diabetes Jane Armitage and Louise Bowman on behalf of the ASCEND
More informationNew Aspects in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: Antithrombotic Therapy
New Aspects in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: Antithrombotic Therapy Hans-Christoph Diener Department of Neurology and Stroke Center University Hospital Essen Germany Conflict of Interest
More informationAnne Carol Goldberg, MD, FACP, FAHA, FNLA Washington University, St. Louis, MO USA
Efficacy and Safety of Bempedoic Acid Added to Maximally Tolerated Statins in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia and High Cardiovascular Risk: The CLEAR Wisdom Trial Anne Carol Goldberg, MD, FACP, FAHA,
More informationCurrent Updates & Challenges In Managing Diabetes in CVD
Current Updates & Challenges In Managing Diabetes in CVD Preventive Cardiovascular Conference 2016 Instituit Jantung Negara 12 th November 2016 Nor Azmi Kamaruddin Diabetes Clinic Department of Medicine
More informationSupplementary material 1. Definitions of study endpoints (extracted from the Endpoint Validation Committee Charter) 1.
Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the SIGNIFY trial: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ivabradine in patients with stable coronary artery disease without clinical
More informationThe ACCELERATE Trial
The ACCELERATE Trial Impact of the Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibitor Evacetrapib on Cardiovascular Outcome Stephen J Nicholls for the ACCELERATE investigators Disclosure Research support: AstraZeneca,
More informationSimilar risk of malignancy with insulin glargine and neutral protamine Hagedorn
Letter Similar risk of malignancy with insulin glargine and neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes: findings from a 5 year randomised, openlabel study J. Rosenstock 1,2,
More informationThis clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.
abcd Clinical Study Synopsis for Public Disclosure This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data. The synopsis which is part of the
More informationSevere Hypoglycemia and Risks of Vascular Events and Death
T h e n e w e ngl a nd j o u r na l o f m e dic i n e original article Severe Hypoglycemia and Risks of Vascular Events and Death Sophia Zoungas, M.D., Ph.D., Anushka Patel, M.D., Ph.D., John Chalmers,
More informationSanofi Announces Results of ORIGIN, the World s Longest and Largest Randomised Clinical Trial in Insulin in Pre- and Early Diabetes
PRESS RELEASE Sanofi Announces Results of ORIGIN, the World s Longest and Largest Randomised Clinical Trial in Insulin in Pre- and Early Diabetes Dublin, Ireland (15 June 2012) Sanofi presented results
More informationRemote management of heart failure using implanted devices and formalized follow-up procedures (REM-HF)
Remote management of heart failure using implanted devices and formalized follow-up procedures (REM-HF) Martin R Cowie Professor of Cardiology, Imperial College London (Royal Brompton Hospital) London,
More informationThe CARI Guidelines Caring for Australians with Renal Impairment. Cardiovascular Risk Factors
Cardiovascular Risk Factors ROB WALKER (Dunedin, New Zealand) Lipid-lowering therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease Date written: January 2005 Final submission: August 2005 Author: Rob Walker
More informationDecision for fibrinolysis or primary PCI in the prehospital phase
Decision for fibrinolysis or primary PCI in the prehospital phase Nicolas Danchin, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France Disclosures Research grants: Astrazeneca, Eli-Lilly, GSK, Merck, Novartis,
More informationReflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular safety profile of medicinal products
25 February 2016 EMA/CHMP/50549/2015 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Reflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular safety profile of medicinal products Draft agreed by Cardiovascular
More informationDisclosures. Dr. Scirica has also served as a consultant for Lexicon, Arena, Gilead, and Eisai.
Disclosures Benjamin M. Scirica, MD, MPH, is employed by the TIMI Study Group, which has received research grants from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb,
More informationComparability of patient-reported health status: multi-country analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes
Comparability of patient-reported health status: multi-country analysis of EQ-5D responses in patients with type 2 diabetes Joshua A Salomon, Anushka Patel, Bruce Neal, Paul Glasziou, Diederick E. Grobbee,
More informationThe target blood pressure in patients with diabetes is <130 mm Hg
Controversies in hypertension, About Diabetes diabetes and and metabolic Cardiovascular syndrome Risk ESC annual congress August 29, 2011 The target blood pressure in patients with diabetes is
More informationFelix Vallotton Ball (1899) LDL-C management in Asian diabetes: moderate vs. high intensity statin --- a lesson from EMPATHY study
Felix Vallotton Ball (1899) LDL-C management in Asian diabetes: moderate vs. high intensity statin --- a lesson from EMPATHY study Conflict of interest disclosure None Committee of Scientific Affairs Committee
More information7 th Munich Vascular Conference
7 th Munich Vascular Conference Secondary prevention of major cardiovascular events in patients with CHD or PAD - What can we learn from EUCLID and COMPASS, evaluating Clopidogrel, Ticagrelor and Univ.-Prof.
More informationTitle: Statins for haemodialysis patients with diabetes? Long-term follow-up endorses the original conclusions of the 4D study.
Manuscript type: Invited Commentary: Title: Statins for haemodialysis patients with diabetes? Long-term follow-up endorses the original conclusions of the 4D study. Authors: David C Wheeler 1 and Bertram
More informationAmong patients with diabetes mellitus, elevated blood. Hypertension
Hypertension Effects of Visit-to-Visit Variability in Systolic Blood Pressure on Macrovascular and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus The ADVANCE Trial Jun Hata, MD,
More informationReflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular risk of medicinal products for the treatment of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases Draft
1 2 3 21 May 2015 EMA/CHMP/50549/2015 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) 4 5 6 7 Reflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular risk of medicinal products for the treatment of cardiovascular
More informationAmong patients with diabetes mellitus, elevated blood. Hypertension
Hypertension Effects of Visit-to-Visit Variability in Systolic Blood Pressure on Macrovascular and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus The ADVANCE Trial Jun Hata, MD,
More informationAmong patients with diabetes mellitus, elevated blood. Hypertension
Hypertension Effects of Visit-to-Visit Variability in Systolic Blood Pressure on Macrovascular and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus The ADVANCE Trial Jun Hata, MD,
More informationUpdate on CVD and Microvascular Complications in T2D
Update on CVD and Microvascular Complications in T2D Jay S. Skyler, MD, MACP Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism and Diabetes Research Institute University of Miami Miller School of Medicine
More informationType of intervention Treatment and secondary prevention. Economic study type Cost-effectiveness analysis.
Cost effectiveness in the treatment of heart failure with ramipril: a Swedish substudy of the AIRE study Erhardt L, Ball S, Andersson F, Bergentoft P, Martinez C. Record Status This is a critical abstract
More informationDiabetes and Hypertension
Diabetes and Hypertension William C. Cushman, MD, FAHA, FACP, FASH Chief, Preventive Medicine, Veterans Affairs Medical Center Professor, Preventive Medicine, Medicine, and Physiology University of Tennessee
More informationCan We Reduce Heart Failure by Treating Diabetes? CVOT Data on SGLT2 Inhibitors and GLP-1Receptor Agonists
Can We Reduce Heart Failure by Treating Diabetes? CVOT Data on SGLT2 Inhibitors and GLP-1Receptor Agonists Robert R. Henry, MD Professor of Medicine University of California, San Diego Relevant Conflict
More informationComplications of Diabetes: Screening and Prevention
Complications of Diabetes: Screening and Prevention Dr Steve Cleland Consultant Physician GGH and QEUH Diabetes Staff Education Course June 17 Diabetic Complications Microvascular: Retinopathy Nephropathy
More informationEffect of SGLT-2 Inhibitors on the Heart. Robert Zimmerman MD Vice Chairman Endocrinology Director Diabetes Center Cleveland Clinic
Effect of SGLT-2 Inhibitors on the Heart Robert Zimmerman MD Vice Chairman Endocrinology Director Diabetes Center Cleveland Clinic Disclosures Speaker - Johnson and Johnson - Merck Research - Merck - Novo
More informationAntithrombotic therapy in the ACS patient with atrial fibrillation
Antithrombotic therapy in the ACS patient with atrial fibrillation Kurt Huber, MD, FESC, FACC, FAHA 3 rd Medical Department Cardiology & Emergency Medicine Wilhelminenhospital Vienna, Austria Great Minds,
More informationRandomized Comparison of the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Long-term Administration of AMG 145: 52-Week Results From the OSLER Study
Randomized Comparison of the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Long-term Administration of AMG 145: 52-Week Results From the OSLER Study Michael J Koren 1, Robert P Giugliano 2, Frederick Raal 3, David
More informationFactors Predictive of Weight Gain and Implications for Modeling in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Initiating Metformin and Sulfonylurea Combination Therapy
Diabetes Ther (2015) 6:495 507 DOI 10.1007/s13300-015-0134-y ORIGINAL RESEARCH Factors Predictive of Weight Gain and Implications for Modeling in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Initiating Metformin and Sulfonylurea
More informationSoo LIM, MD, PHD Internal Medicine Seoul National University Bundang Hospital
Soo LIM, MD, PHD Internal Medicine Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Agenda Association between Cardiovascular Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Importance of HbA1c Management esp. High risk patients
More informationA Patient Unsuitable for VKA Treatment
Will Apixaban change practice in atrial fibrillation? A Patient Unsuitable for VKA Treatment Professor Yoseph Rozenman The E. Wolfson Medical Center Jerusalem June 2013 Disclosures I have the following
More informationStatistical challenges of meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in a regulatory setting
Statistical challenges of meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in a regulatory setting Frank Pétavy ISCTM 14th Annual Scientific Meeting, Washington D.C. Presented by Frank Pétavy on 21 February
More informationChapter 2: Identification and Care of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease
Chapter 2: Identification and Care of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Introduction The examination of care in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant challenge, as most large datasets
More informationin patients with diabetes, nephropathy and/or chronic kidney disease Summary of recommendations July 2017
Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and Renal Association clinical guidelines: Hypertension management and reninangiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in patients with diabetes, nephropathy
More informationDownloaded from:
Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration. (inc. Meade, TW), (2002) Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high
More informationAn introduction to Quality by Design. Dr Martin Landray University of Oxford
An introduction to Quality by Design Dr Martin Landray University of Oxford Criteria for a good trial Ask an IMPORTANT question Answer it RELIABLY Quality Quality is the absence of errors that matter to
More informationOvercoming the Risk-Treatment Paradox in Non-STE ACS: It s Time! Christopher Granger, MD
Overcoming the Risk-Treatment Paradox in Non-STE ACS: It s Time! Christopher Granger, MD Disclosures Research contracts: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, GSK, Sanofi-Aventis, BMS, Pfizer, The Medicines Company,
More informationThe debate about appropriate blood pressure
CMAJ Review CME Risks and benefits of intensive blood pressure lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes Doreen M. Rabi MD MSc, Raj Padwal MD MSc, Sheldon W. Tobe MD, Richard E. Gilbert MD PhD, Lawrence
More informationUSRDS UNITED STATES RENAL DATA SYSTEM
USRDS UNITED STATES RENAL DATA SYSTEM Chapter 2: Identification and Care of Patients With CKD Over half of patients from the Medicare 5 percent sample have either a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease
More informationNovel Anticoagulants : Bleeding and Bridging
Novel Anticoagulants : Bleeding and Bridging Michael D. Ezekowitz, MBChB, DPhil, FACC, FAHA, FRCP, MA Professor, Thomas Jefferson Medical School Director Atrial Fibrillation Research and Education The
More informationClinical Seminar. Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective
Clinical Seminar Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective Stephan Windecker Department of Cardiology Swiss Cardiovascular Center and Clinical
More informationA.K. Gitt, F. Towae, C. Juenger, A. Papp, R. Zahn, U. Zeymer, J. Senges For the STAR-Study-Group Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Germany
Impact of Interventional Versus Conservative Approach on 5-Year-Mortality of Patients With Stable Angina and Documented Coronary Artery Disease in Clinical Practice: Results of the STAR-Registry A.K. Gitt,
More informationClinical Trials. Hans-Christoph Diener Senior Professor of Clinical Neuroscienes Medical Faculty University Duisburg-Essen Germany
Clinical Trials Hans-Christoph Diener Senior Professor of Clinical Neuroscienes Medical Faculty University Duisburg-Essen Germany Conflict of Interest Statement German Research Council German Ministry
More informationPlatelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in acute coronary syndromes
European Heart Journal (00) 3, 1441 1448 doi:10.1053/euhj.00.3160, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in acute coronary syndromes Gradient of benefit
More informationEvidence grades for the recommendations
Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and Renal Association clinical guidelines: Hypertension management and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in patients with diabetes, nephropathy
More informationMacrovascular Residual Risk. What risk remains after LDL-C management and intensive therapy?
Macrovascular Residual Risk What risk remains after LDL-C management and intensive therapy? Defining Residual Vascular Risk The risk of macrovascular events and microvascular complications which persists
More informationImplications of Universal MI Definition for Clinical Trials
Implications of Universal MI Definition for Clinical Trials Stephen D. Wiviott, MD Chairman, Clinical Events Committee TIMI Study Group Cardiovascular Division Brigham and Women s Hospital Harvard Medical
More informationJ-curve Revisited. An Analysis of Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Events in the Treating to New Targets (TNT) Trial
J-curve Revisited An Analysis of Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Events in the Treating to New Targets (TNT) Trial Sripal Bangalore, MD, MHA, Franz H Messerli, MD, Chuan-Chuan Wun, PhD, Andrea L. Zuckerman,
More informationLATE BREAKING STUDIES IN DM AND CAD. Will this change the guidelines?
LATE BREAKING STUDIES IN DM AND CAD Will this change the guidelines? Objectives 1. Discuss current guidelines for prevention of CHD in diabetes. 2. Discuss the FDA Guidance for Industry regarding evaluating
More informationCardiovascular Events During Differing Hypertension Therapies in Patients With Diabetes
Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 56, No. 1, 2010 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN 0735-1097/$36.00 Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.02.046
More informationLIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Diabetes & Endocrinology 2005 Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh Diabetes and lipids 1 G Marshall, 2 M Fisher 1 Research Fellow, Department of Cardiology, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland,
More informationCARDIO-RENAL SYNDROME
CARDIO-RENAL SYNDROME Luis M Ruilope Athens, October 216 DISCLOSURES: ADVISOR/SPEAKER for Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Esteve, GSK Janssen, Lacer, Medtronic, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Relypsa,
More informationDiabete: terapia nei pazienti a rischio cardiovascolare
Diabete: terapia nei pazienti a rischio cardiovascolare Giorgio Sesti Università Magna Graecia di Catanzaro Cardiovascular mortality in relation to diabetes mellitus and a prior MI: A Danish Population
More informationACEIs for cardiovascular risk reduction
clinical Andrew Sindone Jonathan Erlich Vlado Perkovic Michael Suranyi Henry Newman Choon Lee Edward Barin Simon D Roger ACEIs for cardiovascular risk reduction Have we taken our eye off the ball? Background
More informationegfr > 50 (n = 13,916)
Saxagliptin and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Moderate or Severe Renal Impairment: Observations from the SAVOR-TIMI 53 Trial Supplementary Table 1. Characteristics according
More informationFOCUS: Fluoxetine Or Control Under Supervision Results. Martin Dennis on behalf of the FOCUS collaborators
FOCUS: Fluoxetine Or Control Under Supervision Results Martin Dennis on behalf of the FOCUS collaborators Background Pre clinical and imaging studies had suggested benefits from fluoxetine (and other SSRIs)
More informationProblem patients in primary care Patient 4: Peripheral artery disease
Problem patients in primary care Patient 4: Peripheral artery disease Dr Terry McCormack Hambleton Richmond Whitby Clinical Commissioning Group Research Lead 01/05/2014 Delivering clinical research to
More information10/27/2011. Challenges in Anti-diabetic Global Drug Development A Shift from Surrogate to Outcome Trials. Disclaimer
Challenges in Anti-diabetic Global Drug Development A Shift from Surrogate to Outcome Trials Eckhard Leifke, MD PhD Senior Medical Director Takeda Global Research Development Center, Inc. Presentation
More information1. Albuminuria an early sign of glomerular damage and renal disease. albuminuria
1. Albuminuria an early sign of glomerular damage and renal disease albuminuria Cardio-renal continuum REGRESS Target organ damage Asymptomatic CKD New risk factors Atherosclerosis Target organ damage
More informationACR OA Guideline Development Process Knee and Hip
ACR OA Guideline Development Process Knee and Hip 1. Literature searching frame work Literature searches were developed based on the scenarios. A comprehensive search strategy was used to guide the process
More informationA common clinical dilemma. Ischaemic stroke or TIA with atrial fibrillation MRI scan with blood-sensitive imaging shows cerebral microbleeds
Cerebral microbleeds and intracranial haemorrhage risk in patients with atrial fibrillation after acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack: multicentre observational cohort study D. Wilson,
More informationLowering blood pressure in 2003
UPDATE CLINICAL UPDATE Lowering blood pressure in 2003 John P Chalmers and Leonard F Arnolda Institute for International Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW. John P Chalmers, MD, FRACP, Professor
More informationCARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial)
CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF FEBUXOSTAT OR ALLOPURINOL IN PATIENTS WITH GOUT AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE (The CARES Trial) William B. White, MD, for the CARES Investigators Calhoun Cardiology Center University
More informationTreatment to reduce cardiovascular risk: multifactorial management
Treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk: multifactorial management Matteo Anselmino, MD PhD Assistant Professor San Giovanni Battista Hospital Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine University
More informationTICAGRELOR VERSUS CLOPIDOGREL AFTER THROMBOLYTIC THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH ST- ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION: A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL
TICAGRELOR VERSUS CLOPIDOGREL AFTER THROMBOLYTIC THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH ST- ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION: A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL Otavio Berwanger, MD, PhD - On behalf of the TREAT Trial Steering
More informationCardiovascular Risk of Celecoxib in 6 Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials: The Cross Trial Safety Analysis
Cardiovascular Risk of Celecoxib in 6 Randomized Placebo-controlled Trials: The Cross Trial Safety Analysis Scott D. Solomon, MD, Janet Wittes, PhD, Ernest Hawk, MD, MPH for the Celecoxib Cross Trials
More informationDisclosures (2013 to the present)
What level and types of CV safety data acquisition should be considered to sufficiently characterize a drug s benefit/risk assessment by the end of Phase 3 development? Cardiac Safety Research Consortium
More informationANGIOTENSIN-CONVERTING
BRIEF REPORT Impact of on Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction and Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Heart Failure Catherine Demers, MD, MSc John J. V. McMurray, MD Karl Swedberg, MD, PhD Marc A. Pfeffer,
More informationN Engl J Med 2018;378: DOI: /NEJMoa Lin, Wan-Ting 2018/06/27
N Engl J Med 2018;378:1200-10. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1710895 Lin, Wan-Ting 2018/06/27 1 Introduction Gout is a chronic illness characterized by hyperuricemia, arthropathy, tophus development, and urolithiasis
More informationMyocardial Injury after Noncardiac Surgery (MINS): What is it and what can we do to help patients suffering this event? PJ Devereaux, MD, PhD
Myocardial Injury after Noncardiac Surgery (MINS): What is it and what can we do to help patients suffering this event? PJ Devereaux, MD, PhD Disclosure Member of research group with policy of not accepting
More informationModule 5. The Epidemiological Basis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Landon Myer School of Public Health & Family Medicine, University of Cape Town
Module 5 The Epidemiological Basis of Randomised Controlled Trials Landon Myer School of Public Health & Family Medicine, University of Cape Town Introduction The Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) is the
More informationASCEND Randomized placebo-controlled trial of aspirin 100 mg daily in 15,480 patients with diabetes and no baseline cardiovascular disease
ASCEND Randomized placebo-controlled trial of aspirin 100 mg daily in 15,480 patients with diabetes and no baseline cardiovascular disease Jane Armitage and Louise Bowman on behalf of the ASCEND Study
More information